Tumwater's Trosper Road and Capitol Boulevard reconfiguration project costs are expected to go up

Posted

Tumwater’s reconfiguration project for I-5, Trosper Road, and Capitol Boulevard will cost an additional $1,701,021, said Engineering Services Manager Bill Lindauer to the Public Works Committee on Thursday, May 23. 

The reconfiguration project involves the construction of three roundabouts, which connect to the on- and off-ramps of I-5, and a new road extending from Lee Street.  

Lindauer said that they expect “substantial completion” by the end of July which means that the facility can safely operate by then. They do not expect total completion until September, but Lindauer said they are now in a comfortable spot to project the total cost of the project.  

The project was estimated at $12,150,150, but the additional expenditures would raise the total cost to $13,851,171. 

Lindauer attributed the new costs to several reasons. One factor was that the city had to accommodate changes to the project after the discovery of unknown underground utilities and other underground obstructions like old foundations and stormwater structures. 

The city also had to extend the sewer main at the south side of the project site 180 feet further south to connect with a manhole as there were issues connecting the sewer main with a closer manhole. 

Lindauer added that they will need to improve the infiltration capacity of a storm pond in the project site and have decided to also work on improvements for Lee and Linda Streets.  

The additional costs will be reflected in the city’s contract with Active Construction Inc. which the city hired to construct the project.  

As the city’s engineering director does not have the authority to increase the contract by $1.7 million, the city staff are requesting that the city council expand the engineering director’s authority in approving amendments to this specific contract. 

The engineer director’s authority currently allows amendments to public works contract if the modification does not increase the contract value by more than 10%. City staff are specifically requesting to raise the limit to 20% for this specific contract.  

If approved, the director would have the authority to add $1.7 million to the contract, which corresponds to 14% of the original contract value. 

Lindauer added that the additional costs will be funded under the city’s transportation, water, sewer, and storm capital facilities funds. 

The Public Works Committee agreed to endorse the city staff’s request to the city council, which will consider it for approval as part of their consent agenda in its June 4 meeting. 

Comments

6 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here

  • OlyBlues

    The incompetence by city officials and engineers overseeing this project is really unbelievable. The city is acting like this $1.7 million cost overage is normal when in reality it was the result of extremely poor planning and incompetence. Tumwater has a long history of this, another great example when they failed to require proper road, bridge and signage upgrades to 93rd Ave when they approved the Pilot Truck Stop and heavy traffic jams followed. Tumwater taxpayers are sure getting the short end of the stick under Mayor Debbie Sullivan's administration. It is just one disaster after another.

    Wednesday, May 29 Report this

  • Claire

    Once again, Tumwater's residents get screwed because of incompetence in the Public Works department. Active Construction has, once again, figured out a way to milk this project for all they can. Thurston County suffers from the.same myopic "vision".

    Wednesday, May 29 Report this

  • MartyKenney

    I respectfully disagree with the previous two comments. I think the project as a whole has been a huge success, and I for one greatly appreciate using the roundabouts (even during construction its more efficient than before!)

    Seeing it come to a completion I'm not surprised they went over. What project doesnt???? The excuses they gave at the council meeting were totally valid in my opinion. And $14m for this kind of infrastructure project that will provide many decades of traffic relief is absolutely worth it in my opinion.

    I cant wait until they get started on the other side lol

    Wednesday, May 29 Report this

  • mathisje

    Incompetence claims are unfair and without factual basis. Anyone who has done a remodel knows that estimates can go out the window once you open up wall and floors. It is routine for construction projects to find surprises when reconstructing in previously built-up areas. Unless you have expert knowledge demonstrating that the City should have known about the overrun features, give the Public Works credit to carrying off a very complex project.

    Wednesday, May 29 Report this

  • PamelaJHanson

    They are putting it on the consent calendar to hush the issue and not have any further discussion (just like the massive golf ball purchase invoice). "Consent Calendar" pay it and forget it? In my opinion, this "$1.7 Million Roundabout Cost Overrun" needs to go on the Tumwater City Council Meeting Agenda and it needs to be live streamed on our Tumwater TV Channel and YouTube Channel. We should be the open government that everyone should envy, right?

    Thursday, May 30 Report this

  • FirstOtter

    Surprise, surprise. Who could have possibly expected this? "Discoveries of previously unknown underground utilitites'. Gosh, who could have thought of THAT? I'm no engineer, but I would have gone over old records and maps before I ever broke ground. I would have called 811 ("Call before you dig") to have a FREE check of what's underground.

    In the meantime, the businesses at that three ring circus are still struggling to survive, indeed, several have gone out of business. Why didn't the City forgive the businesses their business taxes during this porkbarrel construction? They lost a lot of business, but what the hey, right, Tumwater? It's not real money, no, it's coming out of our hides, not theirs.

    Saying the city can't be held responsible for cost over runs is gaslighting. It is SUPPOSED to be able to come up with a number that will demonstrate the cost of the work, and if they think it will go over, STATE IT. There's plenty of people who have degrees in just that sort of field. No, I'm betting the cost was low balled to get the citizens paying for it to believe it. Once again, the city and the mayor, are ramming home their personal decisions at the cost of everyone elses.

    Friday, May 31 Report this